Introduction

Purposeful evaluation has a resolute commitment to informing decision- making, where the agent of change is the evidence and how it is shaped, represented and communicated. That evidence does not speak for itself, and well- purposed deliverables are needed to direct and enhance its ‘voice’. A solidly purposed evaluation stands or falls on its reporting; if poorly positioned, reporting can compromise confidence in what is being evidenced, and any prospects for its use.

For purposeful evaluation, that positioning involves not only responsiveness to the evaluation's formal objectives but also negotiating a use- responsive pathway between the many tensions involved in synthesising findings into a narrative readily understood by (and useful to) decision- makers. Much of this book has been concerned with the many possibilities for purposefully shaping and delivering intent- based evidence; this chapter goes further to look at its effective representation. It is followed by a final chapter focusing on wider dissemination and communications issues for optimising evidence use (Chapter 15).

What deliverables, for whom and when?

The starting point for purposeful reporting is clarity on what deliverables are expected and viable. Funder guidance on this can be minimal, stating little more than what type of report(s) is required, necessary timing and perhaps indicative length. This is not a sound starting point for reporting utility. This is compounded by a funding trend towards favouring brevity, with unrealistic limitations set for reporting length. This may help with assimilation, but intensifies reporting challenges in rehearsing necessary detail and substantiation where some evaluators have called for a ‘theory of evidence for evaluation’ (Donaldson et al, 2015) to better balance utility with representation.